On the Wrong Side of Judgment Day

Now that The Stand has been up and running as the blog site for AFA, the trolls have come down out of the hills in force. They especially love to comment on blog posts dealing with homosexuality.

In response to a post by Bryan Fischer earlier this month, a man named Scott crowed: “Give the bigotry a rest. YOU LOST. Hate and homophobia lost. Welcome to the wrong side of history.”

This is a flipping of the more commonly expressed sentiment that the homosexual movement is on “the right side of history.” Opposition to it – especially if you are one of those backwater, Bible-thumpin,’ bumpkin preachers – puts you on “the wrong side of history.” Get it?

The problem with such triumphalism is that it demonstrates an appalling ignorance of history, all while parading as an expert on the subject. The fact of the matter is there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9).

Think homosexuality has never been accepted before? Never been embraced? Never been a part of the fabric of a culture? Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

How about the sexual revolution, out of which the homosexual movement was birthed? Well, there’s nothing revolutionary about it. Humanity has been there, done that. Countless times. According to Oxford University anthropologist J.D. Unwin and Pitirim Sorokin, founder of the sociology department at Harvard University, such sexual “revolutions” always accompanied the decay of once strong, energetic cultures.

Is that what’s happening to us? Are we decaying as a culture? I don’t know, let’s see. Family disintegration? Check. Economic anemia and spiraling debt? Check. Lack of moral clarity? Check. Political chaos? Mmmm, we’re getting there. These signs and a handful of others manifest cultural decay, according to Unwin and Sorokin.

Let’s get back to the subject of sex. How about this: The CDC recently released the startling fact that, at any given time, 110 million Americans (aged 15 and up) have sexually transmitted diseases. Since that age group is roughly 212 million strong, that means – at least according to my pencil and scratch pad – about half of them are infected.

Infected with what? Chlamydia, gonorrhea, hepatitis B, genital herpes, HIV, human papillomavirus, syphilis and trichomoniasis. Some of these are incurable. When I was growing up, we were warned about 2 types of “venereal disease” – syphilis and gonorrhea. At the time, both were easily cured with a shot of penicillin. Now there are more than 20 prevalent types of STDs – and both syphilis and gonorrhea have developed drug-resistant strains.

Half of all new infections every year are in young people aged 15-24, even though the CDC says that this group represents only 25% of those who have ever had sex.

Does that sound like the right side of history to anyone?

Want to talk about homosexuals? Only 2.2% of the American population identifies as homosexual or bisexual men, yet that sliver of the population accounts for 63% of the new HIV cases in the U.S., according to the CDC.

Does that sound like the right side of history?

Being on the “right side of history” is a tricky concept upon which to stake one’s position. Does it refer to what the majority has decided? When actually given the opportunity to vote – not answer a poll question – the majority of people have said they want marriage to be defined as being between one man and one woman. Liberal judges are the best friends of the same sex marriage movement in this country, and liberal judges do not a historical sea-change make.

Moreover, the majority of people in Nazi Germany decided that Jews – as well as gypsies, the disabled, the mentally retarded, and, yes, homosexuals – should be eradicated. Was that the “right side of history,” simply because the majority said so?

Is it the “right side of history” because the homosexual movement demands the opening of marriage to everyone in society? Yes? Then what about polygamists and polyamorists? Incestuous couples? Gay activists say no. But why shouldn’t the “right side of history” include these people?

Don’t get me wrong. What we call the sexual revolution in America was not completely devoid of benefit to us as a culture. I think more openness on the subject was needed.

Even the homosexual movement should not be completely rejected. It was wrong to mistreat and bash and vilify gay men and lesbians, to treat them as less than human, to force them to hide and shuffle about in the dark corners of our culture. While I disagree with much of the agenda of the homosexual movement, it is wrong for Christians to hate or abuse anyone.

However, God alone determines what the right side of history is – and who is on it. That issue – and that issue alone – is what this entire fuss is about. Are we as a culture on the side of the God of the Bible or against Him?

Our Founders understood this issue. Even Thomas Jefferson, who was certainly no evangelical Bible-thumper, knew that our civilization’s main concern should be whether or not we please the Judge of the Universe.

He said, “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.”

God is the source of life. He is the source of liberty. He is the source of the morality that sustains the life and liberty we enjoy. To disavow these truths is to invite judgment – as individuals or as a nation.

So, Scott, even if you were on the right side of history – and you most certainly are not – you will one day be on the wrong side of the Day of Judgment.

And that’s nothing to crow about.

SHOW COMMENTS

Please Note: We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses
the content. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at the author or other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will
not be approved.